Sawant Says the Recall Against Her Will Be a "Disinformation Campaign"



Natalie your timing is off on this. First the district judge has to rewrite the ballot synopsis as the Supreme's said a couple of the charges weren't relevant. Once the judge has rewritten the ballot and provided it to the recall team then they have 180 days. We're probably looking at a couple of weeks before they can start collecting signatures.


A modest distraction from our daily toil crafting new technological distractions for the masses.


"Complicating matters for the Sawant camp is that the Recall Campaign will certainly lean on the Court's ruling in its messaging and in the ballot language itself, conflating the decision of factual sufficiency for a recall with the idea that Sawant is guilty of violating her oath of office."

If Sawant hadn't appealed, she would be in a much better position. Her appeal had no realistic chance of success, and the end result was a decision that many laypeople will interpret as a validation of the merits of the recall petition. She needs to get better lawyers.


Sawant's CAREER is a disinformation campaign.


"This is a call to action," Sawant said. "We know if we allow this recall to succeed, we know that the ruling class will use this as a template to go against movements as a whole.”

If this succeeds, it will be because a significant number of Sawant's constituents supported the recall petition. Does that mean residents of District 3 are the "ruling class?" I'm confused.


Remember, the outside forces that hate Seattle support this recall.

And we all know that Seattle voters hate outside forces trying to control us.


@6 technically the voters of that district are mostly part of the 1% of the global population, and the rest belong to the 5% but they think it's normal that houses cost half a million dollars.


More lies from Sawant. The campaign was founded by a Liberal, left-wing #lgbtq community member

--Sawant's money comes largely from out of state.

--The Recall Sawant donations come largely from Seattle's D3 and average $67. D3 is probably the most liberal in Seattle. It's hard to find a 'right-winger' in D3. We in
D3 just want representation--vs people from out-of-state being respresenated. Sawant has failed D3.

Just more lies from Sawant as she stratches to stay in power. And, her propoganda machine and advertising benefactor, The Stranger, is happy to print her lies


Sawant isn't going anywhere. But it'll be fun to watch folks rant and rave for a few months on Slog.


Hope springs eternal, eh? The next vote surely will finally prove once and for all that Seattle's liberal citizens are fed up with their liberal politicians, itching to expel them decisively and forever. It sort of failed to happen, rather spectacularly, in the last election, and the one before that, and so on, but the chuds have spoken, once again, and by gum this time it's really happening.

And they make fun of Marxists for eternally predicting the imminent collapse of capitalism...


Honestly? I may rent an apartment in that district just to vote her out.


@roboslave - marxists are, like you, boring. Good trotskyists support anyone fighting the man. To the barricades!


"Just because the allegations are factual doesn't mean they're legitimate,..." So, somehow truth is illegitimate?

Reminds of the argument I had with a Trumpie...she was making false claims about Hillary. I proved the claims were false and her reply was, "Well, they feel like they're true."


"...conflating the decision of factual sufficiency for a recall with the idea that Sawant is guilty of violating her oath of office."

It was our Supreme Court's finding of legal sufficiency which says CM Sawant may have violated her oath of office, when she gave Mayor Durkan's legally-protected address to Socialist Alternative:

'However, petitioners also allege that Councilmember Sawant’s conduct in marching on Mayor Durkan’s private residence violated Seattle City Charter article IV, sections 2 and 4, and her oath of office. Specifically, petitioners argue that SMC 4.16.070(D)(1) prohibits council members from disclosing any “confidential information gained by reason of his or her official position for other than a City purpose.” Based on the facts alleged, we believe a voter could conclude that Sawant’s actions constituted a violation of the Seattle city code regarding confidentiality. This charge is legally sufficient.'

(The Stranger would have an easier time reporting on this issue if they would actually quote at length from the ruling, but as it's functionally impossible to do that whilst also supporting CM Sawant's position, I doubt they'll be doing much actual quoting.)


^Yes, I too want an example of these factual claims that somehow aren't legitimate at the same time. But this, of course, is an article about how sawant "feels." And, racism. So much racisms.


@15, 16,

She didn't say they weren't legitimate, she said they haven't yet been proven such. Can you provide objectively indisputable evidence that Sawant personally led the march to Durkan's residence? We'll wait.


@17: I didn't say they weren't legitimate, nor did I claim she had; I was correcting her error in the original post. As I clearly stated @15: "It was our Supreme Court's finding of legal sufficiency which says CM Sawant may have violated her oath of office, when she gave Mayor Durkan's legally-protected address to Socialist Alternative..."

"Can you provide objectively indisputable evidence that Sawant personally led the march to Durkan's residence?"

If the recall of CM Sawant appears on their ballots, the voters of District 3 will decide if CM Sawant should be recalled for, among other actions, her participation in the march to Mayor Durkan's residence. They can use whatever standard they wish; they needn't require "...objectively indisputable evidence that Sawant personally led the march..." Where did you get the idea that would have to be their standard? As our Supreme Court clearly ruled,

"...the facts are sufficient for voters to conclude that information shared by Councilmember Sawant led the protesters to Mayor Durkan’s home. Although she says she did not organize the protest, it is no coincidence that the protestors found themselves in front of Mayor Durkan’s house. Further, since the subject of Councilmember Sawant’s speech at the protest was Mayor Durkan, a voter could find that Councilmember Sawant intended to protest at the mayor’s home and went to the mayor’s home to deliver a message to her. This charge is factually sufficient for a recall."

The voters of District 3 are just as empowered to ignore CM Sawant's denials as were our State's Supreme Court. :-D


Bingo! And you win a free bunny!


@19: As you supporters of CM Sawant continue to inspire the rest of Seattle's citizenry with your grace, charm, wit, and dignity as you face possibility of humiliating defeat, I will return your favor by agreeing that yes, her recall would be just a very good first step.


Every journey begins with a first stomp, I mean step.


@23: I doubt very much District 3 would elect anyone insufficiently liberal. I base my speculation on my having lived (and in some years worked) in what is now District 3 for the twenty-four years prior to Seattle's move to district-based Council seats. If they want to "elect a right-wing piece of shit," (to use your elegant and respectful phrase) is indeed the motivation of the Recall Sawant folks, I predict they would be sorely disappointed. (You've provided no evidence of any such motivation, of course.) Again, your grace, charm, and dignity in addressing your fellow citizens remain unparalleled amongst CM Sawant's supporters.

@22: You're going to have to quote me verbatim -- you know, the usual definition of the cliche, "in black and white" -- where I advocated "subverting and ending democracy" as my "actual goal." In what sense is considering an election an action in "subverting and ending democracy"? Our state has a restrictive, well-defined legal procedure, vetted by multiple courts, for recalling elected officials, and some citizens of District 3 in Seattle have availed themselves of it. If you have any evidence that anything they have done is in violation of our restrictive and involved process for recalling an elected official, then please present it. If you have any evidence that anyone who advocates more voting (!) is doing so in the cause of "subverting and ending democracy," then please present that, as well.

We have a recall process precisely because winning an election does not give any office-holder carte blanche to abuse that office. In the matter of the Socialist Alternative-led attack upon Mayor Durkan's family residence, our state's Supreme Court has ruled there is evidence sufficient for a reasonable person to conclude that CM Sawant abused her office, by using confidential information she received from her office (former US Attorney Durkan's private address) in a matter unrelated to her official duties (helping Socialist Alternative stage a rally there). This attack, and CM Sawant's involvements in it, offended some citizens of District 3, and they have applied for redress. They have fulfilled all of the many requirements a recall petition needs for certification, including CM Sawant's challenge. That you happen not to like what they have done subtracts not at all from their legitimacy in doing it.


@26: Yes, as I wrote, "I doubt very much District 3 would elect anyone insufficiently liberal." (Please do let me know if you want hat written in simpler language -- you seem to need help with it.)

"D3 is the most liberal area in Seattle but there are still those who did [vote for Trump]."

"Trump also did just as well in Seattle as he did in 2016, drawing about 8% of the city’s vote, according to preliminary precinct data released by King County. ( As you noted, D3 is the most liberal area in Seattle, so the percentage was likely even smaller. If a multi-term incumbent with huge name recognition and gobs of money runs such a close election even the tiny Trump vote in D3 can swing it, that just shows how little the D3 voters really care for her.

@7: Are those "... outside forces that hate Seattle ..." currently providing 2/3 of Sawant Solidarity's funds? "The financial reports suggest that she has been running fundraising events in several cities where Socialist Alternative has a significant presence, including Philadelphia and Minneapolis." ( Amusingly, of the 1/3 of her money collected from inside Seattle, less than half comes from District 3. It seems the folks in District 3 have less interest in her retention than do people halfway across the country!


So far in the initial days since the recall was approved Sawant's defense amounts to:

This is a far right, business fueled conspiracy
This is racist
This is an undemocratic attempt to overturn the election and somehow subvert democracy

The facts of the charges are indisputable. She misused city funds in support of a campaign, she violated the governors orders and placed people in danger by allowing them into city hall and she misused her office to provide confidential information to an outside organization. It's the height of hypocrisy for those screaming about this to claim this is somehow undemocratic. When a public official misuses their office it's the obligation of the people to hold them accountable. I didn't see or hear any complaints when recall charges were filed against Jenny Durkin and people were all rooting for Trump to be impeached. There is no difference here.

There can't be a standard of well this wasn't that bad and we should just let it slide. This wasn't a one time thing and it wasn't ignorance. She knowlingly did these things and she should be held accountable. It is up to the voters of District 3 to decide if they rise to the level that she should be removed from office. As for the racism and far right complaints. Save your breath. No one believes any voter in District 3 is some MAGA wearing Trump stooge. That just reeks of desperation and shows how shallow Sawant's playbook is. Without an opponent to demonize she'll have to run on her own record and she knows it's pathetic.

Assuming she is recalled the council will get to appoint a replacement to finish out her term through 2023 and the most likely candidate is someone like Zach DeWolf who Mosqueda actually endorsed in the primary over Sawant. Assuming Mosqueda wins re-election which seems pretty safe at this point she would likely ascend to council president next year and with Dewolf and someone like Brianna Thomas joining her the council would still stiff shift farther to the left with Mosqueda firmly in control. The hang wringing and warnings of monsters in the closet from the Sawant supporters are so far off from reality you have to wonder if they ingested too much of Uncle Ikes products during one of their various vandalism sprees there.

I'm pretty sure this is how the conversation when on Thursday

Recall supporters: In the name of District 3 you are hereby charged with misusing your office
Kshama: Are you threatening me, recall supporters?
Recall supporters: The voters will decide your fate
Kshama: I am DISTRICT 3
Recall Supporters: Not yet
Kshama: (stands up, ignites her lightsaber). Its TREASON then



Well, we all know The Stranger will 100% be in the tank for Sawant, pushing all her misinformation and attacking the recall movement as best it can. So she's got that going for her.


these recall Sawant people need to get jobs or volunteer to assist in the advocacy for homeless folks. This is much ado about nothing and will distract Sawant from her important leadership duties. Durkan is the one who should be recalled for her benign neglect of Seattle on behalf of monied interests. Sawant should stand and fight--nice to have a genuine socialist who thinks, feels and cares on the Seattle City Council.


After Sawant allowed to remain on her Facebook page a call from her followers to boycott black and immigrant owned businesses in D3 (The Postman among them, google it) she lost the support of many. When her husband posted memes gloating about the burning of police precincts literally while we were in the worst beginning days of riots, arsons and shootings, she lost even more. I voted for her once, but never again.


@26: "Anyone who voted for Trump deserves no grace or respect."

Of the many, many reasons I was happy to vote Trump out of office was his cavalier attitude about holding rallies with no regard for public health in a time of COVID. I think any elected official who does that deserves to be removed from office. Do you agree?


ofc she does. In other news today, sky is blue!


@28: "...she misused her office to provide confidential information to an outside organization."
@30: "...The Stranger will 100% be in the tank for Sawant, pushing all her misinformation and attacking the recall movement as best it can."

Let's recall she and Socialist Alternative regard their threatening attack upon Durkan's family residence as a success: our CIty Council sat on their hands when they could well have expelled her, and Mayor Durkan declined to run for re-election. Ernie Lou, and anyone else identified with Recall Sawant, should now expect any privileged information about them in City Hall will be shared with The Stranger. The latter will, in turn, use it to smear Recall Sawant supporters to the fullest extent possible, while piously hiding behind a claim to journalism.